cameras have been there for months and i will take you on that trip to lower manhattan on the fox report. right now, time for your world with neil cavuto. naturally kneel -- $350 billion. but will more spending by the president get the economy going? i am here for >>neil: in -- for neil cavuto. $100 billion for research and development and now $200 billion in business tax breaks. the president will announce details tomorrow. but do not call it stimulus. i am not saying it is not a lot of money. >> why do you not call it a stimulus plan? can't you be straight with the american people? >> does that mean it will not stimulate the economy? >> there are a series of things

that would help put our economy on a stronger road to recovery. >> so it is not stimulus. >> are you prepared to deficit spend? >> there are certainly proposals in here that would do that. >> my next guest supports what the president is doing. democratic congressman from massachusetts joins us now. congressman, in 2007 president bush, then president bush agreed with nancy pelosi on a $168 billion stimulus plan. in march of 2009, president obama passed the $814 billion stimulus program. and now, after all this spending we have 1.percent growth. why do you think another stimulus program would work this time around? >>guest: we have to do something. doing nothing is not an option and if you are in trouble in a

boat you cannot stop bailing. that is the worst possible option. >> but the president has been panicked into this. we have had two weeks of bad economic news. and the poll numbers have come down, down, down. there is an element of desperation here which people, voters, perceive. >>guest: i hope not. for me, i agree with it which generally, i don't necessarily support the details because i don't know the details. the concept is right. i don't care what the pup is, if it is political panicking, so be it, as long as it benefits the states and the economy of the country. >> why do more of something that has cost us an enormous deficit and hasn't given us economic growth or job creation? why do more of the same? >> i don't know how many think, and i will not defend everything we did because some of the things were not right, but, at the same time, i don't know anyone around this area who thinks doing nothing would have been better than doing

something. >> the opposite of stimulus is not nothing. it seems -- you seem lukewarm. >>guest: like anything else, i don't hike spending a last money, either. at the same time, i look at the openings ahead of us. the option to my understanding, do nothing. or do something. and if something is getting people back to work. i'm for it. if i heard options to doing nothing i would listen to them. there are other things. i am in the gung ho on some of the things, the details of this. but, at the same time, i just think when you have 10 percent unemployment, no matter how you pressure it, doing nothing is really not an option. you try different things. >> i sense there is a split when the democrats over the issue of taxes, and over the issue of spending and stimulus. let me draw your attention to something peter or zag wrote today, former budget director.

he said, today, about extending the bush tax cuts for all. "no one wants to make an already stagnating jobs market worse over the next year, which is exactly what would happen if the cuts expire as planned." it seems there is a plitd down the middle between those who want to keep all of the tax cuts going and those who want to tax the rich. where do you stand? >>guest: i am right down the middle. some of the tax cuts need to be extended and some ended and some changed. we shouldn't go back to what we had. that is not good. >> that leaves you with another big new spending plan you are if favor of bass that is what you are in favor of, and, also --. >> and i am in favor of targeted tax cut which extends this in

the short-term. >> do you oppose the $50 billion infrastructure program? >>guest: no, that particular part is long overdue. that's the part i didn't like about the last stimulus. we should have done more infrastructure. it was a mistake then. and right now, those are real jobs that are measured with a long term benefit to the economy to improve our infrastructure. that's part i support strongly. >> given the division when the democrats do you think the votes are in congress before the election to get another $200 billion or $300 billion in stimulus spending. >>guest: don't know the answer. the interesting thing is, why has it been no republican proposals of any kind. i don't mind alternative views. how do we get the economy going. all i have heard from the other side of the aisle, which is

unified, which is shameful, there are no positive opinions. if i disagree, there is no positive suggestions on what we should did to get the economy going. i understand what some don't like everything the president is proposing and i don't agree with everything but i can't believe unless someone wants to stabbed up -- stand up and say do nothing and the economy will be okay ... >> thank you for joining us, sir, we appreciate it. and now the other side, republican congressman from georgia is no fan of the president's plan and he says you cannot spend away this poor economy. 's we get to any ideas that you may have as the congressman wanted to hear, before we get to that, would you, if it was a straight vote, right now, in the house of representatives, would you vote for a $200 billion package of tax breaks for business? >>guest: absolutely not. the definition of in sapty is doing -- insanity is doing the

same thing over and over and expecting a different result. the president knows that. why we are continuing down this road is beyond me. the fact of the matter is there are wonderful, positive, things we could do like decreasing spending at the federal level. like making certain we do not raise taxes on nip especially the job creators during this time of economic challenge. those are the things that bring certainty to the market and turn the economy around. >> in answer to the congressman you would say "stop the spending," and extend tax cuts for everyone. that's your side of the equation? >> absolutely. we have a legal of taxation right now and we neep to keep it there and bring down the capital gains tax and the business taxes so you incent vice job creators and we can't keep spending more money than we take in. that will drive us to bankruptcy as a country. >> can you take the political heat if you say "no" to $200 billion in tax breaks to

business, for example, the democrats will say you are the party of no when it comes to tax breaks for business, they will blame you for the country's economic condition. can you take that political heat? >> the fact of the matter is the president, was out there campaigning yesterday and the country is smarter than this. we know you have to work together positively to solve challenges. they see a president, the commander, not the commander in chief but the campaigner in chief continuing to get out there and talk against the people he needs to help solve the problem: republicans. we have wonderful, positive ideas and we look forward to having the american people say put folk whose have positive ideas if charge and we will move forward. >> would you consider the following deal: a $200 billion tax break for business if all of the tax cuts were extended for everyone. would you accept a deal like that, unlikely as it is to be presented, would you accept it? >> we would be happy to look at it. the fact; we need to decrease

spending at the federal level. you know we have $1.4 trillion in deficit last year, $1.4 trillion had -- this year. we are not creating jobs. >> i am interested in the idea of a deal with a crunch here called an election. is a deal possible? >>guest: if it makes economic sense. you cannot borrow more money, tax some people, decrease taxes or keep them the same on someone else and expect the economy to turn around. >> you never get a deal that is all your way. you will not get that. you have for give something. >>guest: you are right. but when you talk to business, you talk to folks trying to create jobs, what they say is this uncertainty, this ping-ponging is leading for them to hunker down. they are not creating jobs because washington has no idea what it is doing.

we need to work together, solve the problems, together, decrease spending, have certainty and tax rates and help the job creators. >> thank you for gypping -- joining us. >> the president pushing for a new government-run bank for bridge and road repairs. ♪

[ male announcer ] you're at the age where you don't get thrown by curve balls. ♪ this is the age of knowing how to get things done. ♪ so why would you let something like erectile dysfunction get in your way? isn't it time you talked to your doctor about viagra? 20 million men already have. ♪ ith every age comes responsibility. ask your doctor if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take viagra if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. side effects may include headache, flushing,

upset stomach, and abnormal vision. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. stop taking viagra and call your doctor right away if you experience a sudden decrease or loss in vision or hearing. this is the age of taking action. viagra. talk to your doctor. see if america's most prescbed ed treatment is right for you.

>> critics today blast the president's plan for a new infrastructure bank. the $4 billion government-run facility finances everything from bridges to trains to

runways. charles says this thing is a slush fund for unions. charles is the star of the fox business network and joins me now. an infrastructure bank becomes a union slush fund. >>guest: under this administration there is though doubt that is what it would become. they are saying, okay, institutional investors give the treasury department money and the treasury department would fine the opportunities. how backwards is that? there is no way institutions would do that unless there are gashts. if the treasury says we guarantee you x amount a year, and they do not get it, what happens? the money comes from taxpayers. >> sort of a bailout? >>guest: if you are an institution would you give money to help you find business opportunities? >> but this is a new institution, bricks, mortar,

staff, organize, computer systems, $4 billion worth and it will never go away when you set it up. >>guest: it will never go away and also it will be another political pawn, if you will, and, again, when you talk infrastructure $4 billion is not a lot of money but it is a lot if you talking about directing it to specific organizations to pay back and in this case it would go to, it would have to be two things: union. and green. >> so if you are politically correct and connected you would get the money flowing but an oil companies, forget it. >>guest: and you have to in some way also be prepared to do business with the government, as well. these businesses. it is just crazy. >> if sit a slush fund for unions in a democrat administration, who knows who would get the money in a republican administration.

>>guest: you are right. there -- why have fannie mae and freddie mac not been closed down? because whoever is in power, they get that piggy bank. >> could it be the kind offings constitution of frad frad and freddie mac? >>guest: it could fail and the taxpayers have to come to the rescue. >> but it has to be voted for on congress. guess it would be nuts. >> do you thing it will happen? >>guest: no but they throw it out. >> a union slush fund sticks. guess gas it will not play beyond by -- beyond peoria. >> and worries about european banks, with gold up settling at

$12.60 an ounce, the highest ever. gold was higher than that a couple of weeks agos. and gold is considered a safe haven investment during uncertain time and the dow losing 100 points and now back underwater for the year 2010. iran, bucking the united nations. a report today, it is barring some inspectors and refusing to fork over information on nuclear activities. [ engine revving ] [ male annouer ] the u.s. gornment may soon require brake override technogy on all new cs and trucks.

at nissan, wehink this is a good idea. so we did it... ...six years ago. [ wind howling ] nissan. innovation for safety. innovation for all. [ animals calling ]. ♪ [ pop ] [ man ] ♪ well, we get along ♪ yeah, we really do - ♪ and there's nothing wrong - [ bird squawks ] ♪ with what i feel for you ♪ i could hanaround ti the leaves are brown and the summer's gone ♪ [ announcer ] when you're not worried about potential dangers, the world can be a far less threatening pla. take the scary out of life with travelers insurance... and see the world in a different light.

.

>> iran taking a step to ban u.n. inspectors from investigating the nuclear facilities. today the country is saying it has the right to bar u.n. staff it doesn't trust. that's complicating the investigation. my guest says time to stand up before it is too late. the national security analyst joining me now. you want to confront them? >>guest: even the president's national security guide said iran is a year away from having nuclear weapons. one year. and he said that's a long time. i don't think that's a long time. what happens when they get nuclear weapons? iran gets nuclear weapons and when a few days all the other countries in that part of the world say they need them, too, saudi arabia, syria, turkey, egypt, they all feel they need them. >> short of a military confrontation how do you put

pressure on iran? >>guest: both administrations have tried. diplomacy does not work. sanctions are biting. but they are not having much of an effect because of china and russia. i would go to russia. the move is to say to the russians, look, you are helping iran's nuclear weapons program. without you and without your help iran may get them but it will be a long time. what will it take for you to stop cooperating with iran? a couple of billion. what we have done is gone to them and say it would be bad to have a nuclear iran on the border but never offered them money. we should say, stop working with iran and we will make good on all the money you were going to make on the facilities. we will pay you, plus. >> is it possible there is something going on in the background that we don't know about but president obama maybe does, that the iranians are having trouble getting the right

kind of uranium enriched and there was secret intelligence that said opposition to the president of iran is beginning to bubble up and he could be overlone and we have time. supposing, we don't know that. it could be happening. >> do you want to risk the whole world going nuclear? i have been in government since the 1970's, since the early 19 190's we talked about opposition movement in iran and it never materialized. >> but the israelis have been restrainted. it is their security that is directly affected it. they have been restrained. they rattled their sabers but have not done anything. maybe they know something. >>guest: they have been confronted in iraq in 1981, they borned. they were confront two years ago with syria, they bonded. now they said time and time again, iran, nuclear iran represents a threat to israel. they feel if iran gets nuclear

weapons, israel's ability to resist in that part of the world goes down by a lot. so, israel, what are they going to do? we are not sure. would they attack? much said if israel attacks nuclear weapon site there are a lot of complications. there are probably 20 sites, bur ied underground. >> the only thing we can do is ask the russians to quit corroborating? >>guest: the problem is, we did not want to be in a situation where we choose between bonding or letting them get it. we don't have much other than a military opening. and a military option would not be successful. >> so it is the russians help us or we bomb them. that's it? >>guest: or like the obama administration is planning, you

can debate, they think they can "contain" a nuclear iran. don't worry, everyone, in the region, we are in charge and we will make sure they don't use them. if our guarantee is we have been unstable to stop iran from nuclear weapons but we will make sure they don't, that is a hollow leg. i don't want to see that. when the world gets nuclear weapons the whole world changes. afghanistan doesn't matter. iraq doesn't. these do not matter as much as president obama making a decision on confronting a nuclear iran. >> the president ramping up the spending plans. meet the guys saying stand down or the economy will come crashing down. and, then, privacy versus security.

[ manager ] you know...

i've been looking at the numbers, and i think our campus is spending too much money on printing. i'd like to put you in charge of cutting costs. calm down. i know that it is not your job. what i'm saying... excuse me? alright, fine. no, you don't have to do it. ok? [ male announcer ] notre dame knows it's better for xerox to control its printing costs. so they can focus on winning on and off the field. [ manager ] are you sure i can't talk -- ok, no, i get it. [ male announcer ] with xerox,

you're ready for real business. can be unsettling. but what if therwere a different sry? of one financial company that grew stronger through the crisis. when me lost their way, this company led the way. by protecting clies and turning uncertainty into confidence. what if that story were true? it is. ♪

>> election day is eight weeks from today. president obama is poring it on. tomorrow, he announced new moves to kick start the economy. my next guest says it's time to stop what you are doing and reverse what you have done. now, do you just want a dead stop? and a complete reversal of the

entire obama economic policy? >>guest: it is hard to point to anything that has worked. if you think about it, we had the $800 billion stimulus plan but we had four or five smaller stimulus plans from the auto bailout to the mortgage modification programs to the unemployment insurance bill to the bill we passed a few weeks ago to help states and i totaled it up for this show and it is close to $1.2 trillion or $1.3 trillion, the most expensive public policy fair in american history. the unemployment rate has been rising and we have had 16 months of 9 percent unemployment. i don't think this has worked. and, a lot of these big killers in the economy like obama care have not hit. >> but are you gambling? if you stop it dead, stop the spending, just go on from here with no more spending or

stimulus spending, there is a gamble, isn't there, you really are pushing unemployment higher and slow the economy more? >> my friend, you know we have had a big experiment in economics that did not work during the great depresident reagan. your previous guest had it right: we should be cutting spending. in the mid-1990's the republics cut government spending and we had the government shut down to try to get government spending down. that led to one of the greatest periods of prosperity in american history. cutting spending and at the same time juicing the economy through reagan-style tax cuts gets the economy moving. >> you would cut tax rates from now, forget extending the tax cuts but you would lower tax rates more. >>guest: and i would start by cutting the corporate tax. we have talked about this.

we cannot go on with the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. i favor cutting that to at the most 25 percent. hopefully closer to 20 percent. >> i am with you economically but thing of the political sea change, 18 months ago it because all government and government spending and subsidies and stimulus. are you saying the political will, you think it is there 18 months later to totally reverse course? >>guest: it is in the there now but in three months it will be there because there will be a monster election where people revolt and repudiate what has happened the last year. and one positive thing if i may about president obama because i know this is out of character but i like some of the tax proposals he has put on the table the last couple of days especially the idea of allowing businesses to ex-expense their

capital purchase. that is a great idea and that would stimulate the economy and it is a change of direction from the administration that i like a lot. >> but the republicans will not go for it. >>guest: they should. >> unless it is attached to tax cuts for everyone including the rich. >>guest: i am in line for wanting to keep the taxes where they are but the idea of an expensing bill for corporations is pro growth and if that is the proposal republics should get behind it but one caveat is obama wants to do it for one year. but if you do it for one year you fast forward or accelerate spending that would have happened future years, you need to make it permanent. >> stop dead, go into reverse, thank you from the wall street journal. protecting your privacy or protecting america. that's the argument. the american civil liberties union is suing homeland security

offer border searches of laptops. the aclu says they should not look unless there is reasonable chance of a crime. the judge agrees. i will argue on constitutional grounds. a student of islamic studies crossing the border from canada coming to america. this is the suit. they take his suitcase, his laptop and they weapon the laptop for 11 days and he says, not fair, wrong. so, i'm saying, what's the difference between a suitcase, any customs guy, any agent of the period can look at your suitcase and open it and in expect it, what is the different -- difference between a suitcase and a laptop? >> you put into a laptop information you do not expect to go to the government and the constitution reserves things of

this nature. in the clash which you set up so nicely in the introduction between personal privacy and safety, the framers did not put them in a position of equality. they pull at the doubt in favor of the privacy and against personal safety. it looks like a copy of the constitution in the hands of an englishman. >> nowhere in this wonderful document does it say anything about not being allowed to search anybody we want and anything we want at the border. i would be inklined to agree if we were calling the streets of new york city. >>guest: the fourth amendment says the people should be protected in their houses, papers, and personal affects, and the government may not -- it doesn't say "citizens," or "only

in new jersey," or "new york." it is where the constitution regulates the government. >> at the border? >>guest: absolutely. they found nothing incriminating. but love letters and his personal income taxes. >> but they have a perfect right to open his suitcase and look at. >>guest: with their eyes what they can see. but beyond that, like inside the phone or wallet or pocket. >> what is seasonable grounds for suspicion. >>guest: the constitution says probable cause, more likely than not there is evidence of a crime. if they think that, keep the laptop. go to a judge. demonstrate to the judge what the crime is. if a judge agrees, you get the search warrant and you can go to the laptop. if he or she does not, you give the laptop back. do you like that document?

you love the fourth amendment. even at the border. >> judge, a pleasure. don't forget to catch "freedom watch," on weekends on fox business network. the president looking for a way to spend the new spending to spend the new spending proposal with a tax on everyones gonna be great. got the gecko t-shirt... "4 million drivers switched!" gecko water bottle... notebook... chamois... gecko: sir, i feel a little bit uncomfortable with all... you know... with all this. i mean, it's not about me. should be about how geico's the third-largest car insurance company in the nation. things like that. boss: oh, of course! we're not gonna get carried away. gecko: uh...yeah... all right as long as we don't overdo it. vo: geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. ♪ [ male announcer ] it's a symbol confidence...

♪ ...honor... ♪ ...and trust. an unspoken bond that, while common among men... ♪ ...is exceedingly rare among companies. the ram 60-day handshake. ram.

but these days you need more than the book. you need website develoent, 1-on-1 marketing advice, search-engine marketing, and direct mail. yellowbook's got all of that. yellowbook360's got a whole spectrum of tools. tools that are going to spark some real connections. visit yellowbook360.com and go beyond yellow.

some say money cannot buy happiness. but now proof that theory might not be true up to a point. a report showing happiness goes up with people's salaries but levels off at $75,000 a year. dave says the report is on to something but you can find financial peacemaking less than that. and now, from his hit radio

show. dave, good to see you. >>guest: good to see you. i heard you were turning to keynesian. >> that is lie. absolutely. you get increases financial piece of mind up to $75,000 a year. before we discuss that what happens after $75,000 a year? >>guest: this makes discussing what is obvious, fun, obviously, $76,000, and are you twice as happy if you make $150,000, as making $75,000? absolutely not. we have spiritualness, and relationships with spouses, and kids, and they contribute to health. but being broke is a spiritual thing or what leads to happiness, studies do a good job of debunking that myth but it is a lot tougher to feed a couple of kids and make a house payment and the stress that goes with

that and the stress it puts on your life when you don't make money. it can be done. you have to learn on less than you make. a concept congress cannot grass. and put together a game plan to have a sense of control. we take couples and individuals in our counselling so they can start to win with money just they have become pro-active and start happening to the money rather than happening to them. >> it is about piece of money. if you can pay the bills it feels good, you are not thrown all over the place by an unexpected bill. you are saying you can get this way below $75,000 a year family income, if you have your debt either nonexistent or under control. >>guest: absolutely, a matter of personal discipline. if you are married. and a matter of relationship leadershipping to work together. it is not the amount that matters as much as the matter of

what my friend would say "intentional," in purpose driven life or to be pro-active. those are bigger elements in if you have peace and happiness in your money than the actual amounts. we all meet people making $300,000 and they do not have peace because they spend $400,000. like the appetite of congress. if you meet someone who makes $40,000 and they are content and in control, that happiness factor can kick in. and it is not the amount. >> i think you are fighting the culture. because as an outsider, a foreigner, i look at americans and think they are never happy unless they are buying. unless they are consuming. am i on to something? >>guest: you are on to something. >> money can't buy you happiness but i will give it a good try. is that okay? >> that will work. good to be with you. >> always a pleasure.

so, how is the president going to pay for the $50 billion infrastructure plan? oil companies? yes. a report says that is where he is going to get the cash. my guess says this will end up pushing up gas prices. phil, you say if we pay for this infrastructure program at $50 bill it comes out of my gas taxes. >>guest: this will cost american jobs. a reason why some of the tax credits were given to the oil company was because in the united states we tax the oil companies higher than anywhere else open the globe and to get oil projects done in the united states they got the tax credit so we would not lose jobs overseas. when they take that away, the jobs go away, we produce less oil and prices go higher. >> the president says these are loopholes being taken away from the companies.

>>guest: that created jobs in the country. you close the loopholes you will take away jobs. it will be cheaper to produce oil in any other country in the world. you have to remember, the u.s. oil industry creates millions of jobs in this country. and they do so when they are the highest tax industries out there. you compare it to any other industry and they get taxed more than anyone else. and now you take away the one so-called loophole that makes u.s. energy companies competitive in the u.s. with countries abroad and you will see operations close down and jobs go overseas. >> i am coming at this from a different direction, we have a massive oversupply of oil in the united states and there are 50 million more barrels in storm -- in storage and i thought gas prices would go down but i could be right but that would give the president some leeway to impose the new taxes and cancel out my

price decliefn with his price rise. >>guest: i think you are a smart guy and it coincides in time for the midterm election. between now and the midterm election that is the softest demand period of the year. after the election, when prices go back up, he can blame opec or someone else when we all know that it was his policies that helped the prices go up. >> absent the tax and absent his policies on oil and gas we could see the gas prices come down sharply in the next couple of months? >> absolutely. if thisst not go through they could fall 15 cents to 25 cent. right now the pries are -- prices ever in the summer. i can see a major drop in price if the government doesn't get in the way.

>> so you get a drop of 15 cents or 25 cent as gallon how much does it go up if the loopholes are closed? >>guest: over the long run it can wipe out the 25 cents of the maybe not immediately. it would take time to set. but you have a drilling moratorium going on until at least the end of october. you have people that are losing jobs in the oil industry each day. you have to look at it from the per expect i of the overall economy, not only will gasoline prices go up, we will lose more jobs, people need more stress and you do not spend as much. it is a bad idea. >> thank you, phil. some people will do anything to get a look of the "your world" website and this guy scaled a 6 discovery skyscraper to see it and the police were not impressed and they arrested him.

we are kidding. but dpox -- foxnews.com/your world has more information on that. >> democrats a big win for unions? stay tuned.

>> democrats losing lots of seats in november could be a good change for unions? the c.e.o. of the afl-cio has put this spin on it. he says that it could make them, the democrats, come up with an agenda and stick to it. it is reported that the union leaders think a leaner more

aggressive democratic party will put pro union bills through. and now, from the utility workers union of america, a friend of this program and we have clashed many times before. welcome back. fess guess great to -- >>guest: great to be here. >> suppose there is a significant republican victory in november. i don't know that will happen but say that happens. are you so keen to get car check through you would push it through a lame duck session in defiance of what voters want and what public opinion wants. would you do that? guess we would push it through at every opportunity. there is no, there is no evidence that voters don't like the employee free choice act or don't want the workers to have the opportunity to make unthey've own mind about being in a union.

>> there is. if the republicans win back in november it is a repudiation of the democrats, their economic policy and their foreign policy, and the union policy, as well. the unions, the democrats have been firmly on the union side for the last 18 months. if the democrats lose sit repudiation of their position on unions but you would defy that and you would actually push this in a lame duck session? >>guest: we will push the free choice act and the right of american workers to freely decide whether to be in a union at every opportunity. >> you are desperate. the union membership is declining. you borrowed to finance and help pay for president obama's campaign. you are in debt. you need new members. you need more union dues coming at you because you are desperate. >>guest: this is not about due

but policy and working families, in america. >> you need the union dues. >>guest: let me finish my one sentence: about 30 years of declining wages and that's the reason we can't get out of this recession. every economist will tell you it is lack of consumer demand because we have had 30 years of stagnant and declining wages. and it is quality of life. not dues. >> you want to continue the union membership, extend union rules into all facets of american life. so, if apple, the computer company, had been unionized since day one, it was a union company, top-to-bottom from day one the way you like, would it be the same dynamic, brillant company it is today? >>guest: i do. i do. union workers are the most productive, and union workers are the most innovative.

>> it is not okay for high-tech innovative creative people if the year 2010. they work 24/7. >>guest: the most high-tech companies in america is entirely unionized and that's at&t wireless. entireless unionized. at&t is entirely unionized. verizon is entirely unionized. you cannot name an innovative high-tech company that is unionized. >>guest: i just did, at&t and verizon. >> at&t install the gadgets, they do not build the gadgets. >>guest: the technicians on this network or union. the technicians on nbc and abc

and cbs are union. very high-tech workers are union. >> you are getting the worst. i don't think apple would be the same company, the brilliant company it is if it was loaded down with work crews. i don't see it. guess guess and every company that goes union negotiates its own contract and in cases where innovation is important that can get negotiated into the contract. by the way, we had the largest growth in a generation in 2006 and 2007. there is no evidence that the labor movement is in deep trouble or desperate for dues. we don't what to grow. it is important tore grow. and if market share. >> i am flatout of time. it has been a pleasure. neil is back tomorrow and a

special 9/11 coverage on saturday, former new york governor and attorney general gonzales will be here tomorrow. i'm a random windstorm.

shaky! shaky! shaky! shaky! [ laughs ] shaky! shaky! [ gasps ] and if you named your own price on car insurance,

you could be picking up this tab yourself. so get allstate. you could save some cash and be better protected from mayhem like me. [ dennis ] dollar for dollar nobody protects you from mayhem like allstate.